Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs
Rebuttal to the news item published in the Hindu dated 02.11.2022 titled as ‘At bhoomiheen camp, allottee outnumbered by disappointed applicant’
Attention is drawn to a news item published in ‘The Hindu’ newspaper on 2nd Nov. 2022 titled as ‘At bhoomiheen camp, allottee outnumbered by disappointed applicant’. The aforementioned news item is factually incorrect.
The news item has mentioned name of two beneficiaries namely  Kamla Halder and  Meeta Rai alleging that they have made the payment and completed documentation but not included in the list of beneficiaries to be handed over possession letter and keys on 2nd Nov. 2022.
It is clarified that Ms Kamla Halder didn’t submit her bank statement to substantiate that the requisite amount has been deposited through her own bank account or that of her family member. As per the policy, the allottee needs to deposit the requisite amount from its own account or account of its family member and verification of this aspect is scrupulously followed in all cases. Since, the above document was not deposited by Ms Halder despite several requests, her name was not included in the list of beneficiary who were handed over keys and possession letter on 2nd Nov. 2022. Further the requisite amount from Ms Meeta Rai was deposited on 21st Oct 2022. By the time it got verified from accounts department, the list of beneficiaries was already prepared and sent to security agencies for clearance to attend the event dated 2nd Nov. 2022.
The story, based on unverified facts, depict negative picture about the project by concluding that the allottees were outnumbered by the people who made it to the eligibility list but didn’t find their names among Wednesday’s beneficiaries and by those who despite completing all the formalities, were not considered eligible for one BHK flat.. The fact of the matter is that out of those 1862, only 1010 families completed the process as regards the claim of payment as well as scrutiny of documents. The scrutiny reveals that 252 cases found to be under major deficiencies i.e difference in address captured during survey and the address given in the documentation, 126 cases are of short/deficient payment , 57 cases are those in which husband and wife both found to be alive during the survey but one of the spouse reported to be died/missing. Legal requirement for mutation is being followed for mutating the flat in the name of the single spouse/allottee. DDA officials are in constant touch with these allottees to assist them in getting the formalities/additional documentation completed for handing over the possession. Due to aforesaid deficiencies in documentation/payment name of these allottees could not be included in the list.
The correspondent didn’t bother to seek comments of authorized officers of DDA on the above aspects strangely quoted statement of an engineer who was not authorized to issue any statement to the press. Therefore, drawing a sweeping conclusion of the news item based on the unverified facts was highly erroneous and violates ethics of journalism.
The publication, therefore, is requested to publish the aforesaid rebuttal in its newspaper so that complete picture about the project is shown to the readers/public.